Hey, I would love to port this mod to 1.7 for inclusion in a modpack I am working on, but I would like to ask if:

a) I am allowed to do so (like i did with Statues, Chisel and Immibis' mods),
b) if you could clarify the license of the mod's source code.

Hi asie,

The 1.7 branch compiles if you absolutely need an alpha version for use in your modpack. It will spam the console with sound errors, which I've yet to resolve. However, it appears to work okay for the most part.

Keep in mind that I'm making structural changes to many parts of the mod that will likely require a world reset when you switch from an unofficial port to an official version.

Today is my last school day this term so I expect to have plenty of time to finish up a release this next week.

Okay, good to know. Close the issue when the port is completed, if you could, as I'd like to include the mod in my pack then.

And again, could you clarify the license? One of the set rules for my modpack is that each mod is FOSS, that is free open-source software, and I don't want any issues or confusions to happen due to it.

I've looked at a few licenses but can't make up my mind. If you have a suggestion feel free to let me know.

What rights do you want to keep and what rights do you want to give away? Note that for FOSS you need to give away four essential rights:

• to use the software,
• to redistribute the software,
• to modify the software,
• to redistribute modified versions of the software.

Definitely don't use GPL because it's a viral license that forces anyone using any of your code to use the GPL as well, which, while common in Linux development, is uncommon in Minecraft development.

The license choice really depends on what you want to ensure /doesn't/ happen.

You're not the first to ask this, but I am curious about one thing: if permission is given in the mod's thread for distribution in modpacks, isn't that all you need?

It's not that I'm against openness, but I want to retain control over most of the operations while I'm actively developing this.

Most people feel that's enough, but I set out with a goal in mind. The reason why I want openness in the mods I use is precisely the reasons that let my modpack happen:

1. I contribute back to mods. EnhancedPortals, Foundry, etc. have seen pull requests from me; I ported Statues, Chisel, Immibis' Microblocks, RedLogic and am porting more mods to 1.7.2 only thanks to the fact they are on an open license and I can do it.
2. I want to create a coherent ecosystem. If one mod is incompatible from another, I want to be able to add the compatibility myself as soon as possible. If something is broken, I want to be able to fix it myself. I'm not really fond of waiting weeks for someone else to do it for me when I can do it for them.

Anyway, if you want to retain control... you kind of will. The reason is simple: with open-source licenses, you can take everything other people do back - if they make a better version, you can just take their changes back and integrate them back; for this reason I would likely recommend the GNU LGPL license, version 2.1. That's why the official version will naturally become superior - it's the free market and as long as you're providing the best experience, which as the official author you likely are, you're going to have 99% of the users use your version.

Those are good points. I'm going to get a second opinion and I'll let you know what I decide.

Ping.

I followed your recommendation. Sorry about the delay.